11–20 of 103 posts
Summary: The Takeaway Did an AI generate 5 years' worth of highly creative, novel software features from scratch in two weeks? No.
Did an AI complete 5 years' worth of tedious, widespread code-migration technical debt in two weeks? Yes.
When everything is “estimates”, anything sounds amazing. The impressive thing here is that Asana has such a poorly run engineering org that replacing their testing framework was estimated to take 5 years and $6 million.
Also I think the marketing post compares removing a test framework (how is that not trivial?) with replacing it with another.
We engineers, had the power to dictate how our days will look, and we were able to give ballooned timelines to give us room to braeth.
This has changed. The power is no longer in our hands, for good or bad.
I suspect it as a two month project without agents. Max.
Whenever someone does such a huge drastic change like this, it's by ignoring a large chunk of code that most people were afraid to touch for good reasons. Now, that code is gone, AI is celebrated, things will break, people will work very hard in the background to fix it, with no fanfare.
When "5 years of work" take two weeks, you know two things. The estimates were wrong, and nobody will need a project management tool soon.
It doesn’t sound like that much changed. If one engineer can really review all the changes in under two weeks, the original estimate of 5 years of engineering work has to be waaaaaaay off.
all work is stack ranked against other opportunities. no matter how many teams help to parallelize, leadership basically comes down to ranking the stack correctly. Valuable work will be at the top by any means necessary. “mvp”, probes, task forces, code yellows, and so on.
edit: it’s even a backhanded compliment to agentic coding. Asana a public company considers a $12k outlay for something they’d never spend real resources on worth a case study =|
Non prod code, good use case.